Canadian True Crime - 77 The Death of Laura Letts - Part 2

Episode Date: November 17, 2020

Part 2 of a 2-part seriesThe RCMP continue their investigation into the death of Laura Letts, and make an interesting discovery. From there, things would spiral completely out of control.SURVEY: Tell us what you think about Canadian True Crime!Take survey nowCanadian True Crime donates each month to a local justice-focused organization. This month's donation has gone to:Alberta Council of Women's SheltersThanks for supporting my sponsors!See the special offer codes here AD FREE Exclusive feed - Canadian True Crime supportersAccess ad-free episodes, bonus episodes, and more on Patreon and Supercast Learn moreCredits:Research and writing: Kristi LeeSpecial thanks: Tim Petruk, journalist, Kamloops This WeekAdditional research: Hagar BarakAudio editing and production: We Talk of Dreams  Disclaimer voiced by the host of TrueTheme Song: We Talk of DreamsAll credits and information sources can be found on the page for this episode at canadiantruecrime.ca/episodes. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Canadian True Crime is a completely independent production, funded through advertising and direct donations. The podcast contains course language, adult themes, and content of a violent and disturbing nature. Listener discretion is advised. This is part two of a two-part series. Where we left off, Peter Beckett had given his version of events to police, both in an initial statement and during a recreation where he went out on a boat with three investigators. But a lot of other information had started to come out, suggesting that there was a dark side of the marriage between Peter and Laura, which seemed at odds with Peter's side of the story. Peter was described by some as overbearing and domineering. Laura's cousin and friend,

Virginia, reported Laura telling her that Peter predicted that she would die of drowning. And even though this was hearsay, the RCMP had spoken to the psychologist Laura had been seeing to help her deal with her unhappy marriage and learned how an unspecified incident led to Laura filing a physical abuse complaint against Peter, which led to them separating for three months. They reconciled and then Laura had a falling out with her family, who found out that Peter had been married before, which went against the teachings of their religion. Laura and her parents became estranged, which devastated her. The RCMP also found out that Peter had a few different stories about what happened, and his behavior after Laura's death was considered odd,

like the way he wanted to know all about what Google Earth showed of Shelter Bay. When looking into Peter and Laura's finances, the RCMP made an interesting discovery. In the years leading up to Laura's death, she had life insurance policies worth almost $850,000. But the year before she died, she lowered her coverage when she and Peter purchased that large motorhome. The next year, just a few weeks before Laura's death, Peter took out accidental death insurance policies on himself and Laura that increased her coverage. He maintained that Laura was the one who handled the life insurance, and it wasn't him. But the RCMP found his fingerprints on the document. And that's not all. At the same time, investigators discovered that he also applied

for an additional life insurance policy for $300,000. It never made it past the application stage, though. It was declined because of issues with Peter's health. And also, in the weeks before Laura's death, Peter transferred $50,000 from the couple's joint checking account into a GIC term deposit, but in his name only. Ultimately, the RCMP discovered that Peter Beckett stood to gain financially if Laura died. This included the almost $850,000 in life insurance, as well as her teacher's pension, which amounted to around $3,500 a month. But while this was potentially available to him, he hadn't yet tried to make a claim against any of the policies. The lawyer for Laura's family would contact the RCMP to tell them about a strange visit from Peter.

The week after Laura's death, Peter showed up asking for a copy of her will. The lawyer had drawn one up in the 90s, and then another one from 2007, which is the year that the couple separated before reuniting. Peter furiously thumbed through the pages of both wills, only to discover that neither of them mentioned him at all, not as a beneficiary or an executor. This infuriated him. The lawyer had to step out of the room for a minute. When he came back, he saw Peter rifling through his files and told him to leave. Peter and Laura were both good friends with the principal of the elementary school where Laura toured. Her name was Wendy, and Peter called her and asked for her help in planning Laura's memorial

service, particularly with picking out a fountain which he planned to unveil at the service. On the way, Peter asked Wendy if she'd mind if they made a quick stop into his lawyer's office. Wendy reported to the RCMP that Peter told his lawyer that Laura did not have a will, and he had serious suspicions that her parents had had their lawyer manufacture a fake one, which was that one from 2007 when they were separated. Peter then asked Wendy for her opinion. She said they did not have a case, and in any event, Laura's estate was modest. And while Laura's parents were wealthy cattle farmers, it would be a big stretch for Peter to somehow be able to claim Laura's future inheritance.

Wendy told him that whatever he was trying to do here, it was not worth it. But Peter insisted it was a matter of principle. The RCMP had wiretapped his phone and captured a call he made to Laura's aunt Margaret nine months after her death. In the conversation, Peter can be heard saying he was willing to fight for his share of Laura's inheritance. Quote, I'm still their son-in-law, right? So what was due to Laura is certainly due to me. Margaret asked if he would challenge that in court, and Peter said, of course. Quote, and I believe they caused her death. The RCMP also spoke to a friend and farm owner who Peter drove trucks for. The man named Frank

said that he went to visit Peter the night he arrived home from the trip where Laura drowned. He said Peter wouldn't look at him in the eye. Frank felt a strangeness, and he instinctively felt afraid of Peter. Peter's reaction could be explained away by the fact that people in crisis situations don't often react in the way that they're expected to. But Frank had more. He described Peter eating furiously while looking for credit card bills to see if the debt would be covered by Laura's life insurance. Frank also said that later on, Peter insisted the signature on Laura's will was a forgery, and even went so far as to accuse Frank of being in on a plot with Laura's parents to remove him from her will.

So the RCMP investigation uncovered a lot of information on Peter and Laura's relationship, odd behavior from Peter before and after Laura's death, as well as inconsistencies in detail between the stories he told about how she died. But there would be more to come. As you'll remember, according to Peter's statement to police, he was fishing at the stern or back of the zodiac, and Laura was reading an umbrella in the bow or the front. He said Laura must have fallen off when a gust of wind caught the umbrella she was holding. Once he realized he grabbed one of his two fishing rods to reel it in, and as he did, the boat drifted. He grabbed the second rod, and when he realized his wife was submerged in the water, he dropped or threw the rod in the lake.

He couldn't remember which. The RCMP wanted to search the bottom of the lake to see if they could find evidence to compare to this story. In June of 2011, 10 months after Laura's death, they found Peter's fishing rod and her umbrella, just as he said. But their proximity to each other did not match Peter's story. They were discovered close to each other on the bottom of the lake, when there should have been some distance between them. And what's more, the location they were found was not consistent with the direction Peter had claimed the zodiac was going. What did this mean? The RCMP weren't sure, but it did indicate that Peter may not have been telling the truth. On August the 12th, 2011, just days before the first anniversary of Laura's death,

56-year-old Peter Beckett was arrested and charged with her first-degree murder. Laura's family released a statement to the media expressing relief that the investigation was over. As a family, we're waiting for the justice system to take its cause. Please respect our family's privacy as we remember the anniversary of Laura's death. Peter's family in New Zealand received a call from the RCMP to let them know that he'd been arrested. His ex-wife Wendy had remarried, and their four children were then aged 18-30. They were too traumatised to give a statement, but Wendy's husband told the Dominion Post that Peter had not kept in contact with any of his children or his ex-wife after he moved to Canada

some nine years earlier. Peter remained in custody until his trial. While he was there, he made friends with his cellmate, a man who was described later by Kamloops this week as a small-time career criminal. And this cellmate would end up contacting the RCMP with an interesting story to tell. Peter and the cellmate had exchanged stories about the crimes that had landed them in prison. Peter insisted that he was innocent and went on to tell his version of events. As you'll remember, the version he told the RCMP was that he heard a splash and a scream, and that's how he knew Laura had fallen off the boat. But he told a slightly different

version to his neighbour John, the retired police officer, which was that he just happened to look back and saw that she wasn't there. And it was this different version that he also told to his cellmate. Quote, he said that he didn't notice she had fallen off, and by the time he did, he could see her flailing underwater. The cellmate immediately saw the issue with this story. Peter, being the mountainous man that he was, didn't notice a shift in weight distribution at one end of an inflatable boat? The cellmate told him, quote, if that's your version, you're fucked. The bow of the boat would have been standing straight in the air as soon as she fell off. The cellmate noted that when Peter heard this feedback, his story started to change.

He tried to clarify. He told the cellmate that, quote, she just kind of slowly lowered herself in, kind of stealth into the water, basically like a suicide. So first Peter said it was an accident, and now it seemed to be changing to a suicide. The cellmate reported that he and Peter became tight. But at the same time, the cellmate was about to be released from prison, and he felt like Peter was grooming him for something. According to the cellmate, it didn't take long for that to be revealed. Peter gave him a list of five names. On the list were both of Laura's parents, their family lawyer, who he thought altered her will. Virginia, Laura's cousin and close friend, who reported the conversation

where Laura claimed Peter told her he knew exactly how she was going to die, and it would be drowning. And the last name was the lead RCMP investigator. At first, the cellmate went along with it, but as the conversation developed, it became clear that Peter expected him to arrange to take out or kill those witnesses when he was released from prison. The cellmate would say that once he started learning more about the case, his own feelings changed. His sister had been murdered more than a decade beforehand, and he remembered the effect that it had on his family. He decided that he wanted to do something right for once. Quote, even as a hardened, seasoned criminal, something told me that Laura and her family and these potential targets, I had to do something

to prevent this from happening. For the first time in my life, I gave the RCMP information. After he contacted the RCMP, he signed his first ever contract to be a police informant in exchange for $10,000. And the conspiracy continued to unfold, with the informant now reporting everything back to police. He and Peter developed a code to discuss targets on the phone, and Peter told him all about money and riches that were waiting for him on the outside. For example, the informant claimed Peter told him he had diamonds stashed in his jaguar in the windshield wiper reservoir. He also drew a map showing where Laura's parents lived, and they made tentative plans to murder them by burning down their house with them in it.

Peter believed that this would free their money. He also indicated where a stash of dynamite could be found, which he recommended could be utilized as a weapon, and the remainder could be sold on the black market to pay for the additional hits. All Peter wanted was for the cellmate to call on his criminal friends on the outside to see if anyone wanted a hit job. Peter dropped the hint that if the hire did a good job, there could be a relocation to Costa Rica on the cards. The evidence provided by the cellmate turned informant allowed the police to lay more charges. Peter Beckett was charged with five counts of conspiracy to commit murder. This news was obviously of great shock to Laura's parents and her cousin, Virginia.

As Peter waited in Kamloops Regional Correctional Center for his trial date, journalist Tim Patrick from Kamloops this week visited him there more than 20 times. Peter made a point of telling the journalist that he knew his cellmate was a prison informant within half an hour of meeting him, so he just played along. Peter said, quote, I told him exactly what I told everyone else about my understanding of my case. He claimed that the reason he gave those five names to the informant was that he'd been offered the use of a private investigator. He didn't want to murder those people, he just wanted them investigated, he said. He claimed the informant lied, quote, why would I want any of these five

people murdered? I needed them as defense witnesses, they're vital to my defense. He said he believed the RCMP had wrongfully imprisoned him and accused them of inventing a crime that didn't exist so they could get a financial incentive for solving it. In the lead up to the trial, Peter Beckett caused a lot of drama. After hiring four lawyers in the time between his arrest and his trial and then firing each one, Peter declared he would represent himself. According to Kamloops this week, he was a prolific filer of applications during the pre-trial court processes, often submitting heavy stacks of handwritten pages claiming that there was collusion between the

judge, the crown and the RCMP. In one application, he insisted that his lineage went back to St Thomas Beckett of Canterbury from the 12th century, a man who was apparently celibate and fathered no children. Peter claimed that no one in that lineage had ever been charged with a crime. In another application, he compared a BC Supreme Court judge to an Australian sponge cake. Still representing himself, Peter requested access to the crown's evidence. The judge instructed the crown prosecutor to provide it all to him on a hard drive. Peter protested saying that he wasn't comfortable with technology. When he was given the hard drive, he managed to smuggle it illegally out of prison and refused to return it. This caused a massive

delay in the trial. A justice official close to the case called Beckett the ultimate test of the system. Do you have a passion project that you're ready to take to the next level? Square Space makes it easy for anyone to create an engaging web presence, grow a brand and sell anything from your products to the content you create and even your time. When I launched this passion project six years ago, I needed some kind of online hub to manage all the non-podcasting tasks that come with podcasting. I chose Square Space because it's an all-in-one platform that seamlessly helps me achieve multiple goals. It's important to have a website that looks good and I was inspired by Square Space's wide selection of clean and modern templates. They

can be easily customized with pre-built layouts and flexible design tools to fit your needs. You can even browse the category of your business to see examples of what others have done. I use the built-in blogging tools to create a new page for each episode and there are so many intuitive options from embedding an audio player so listeners can stream episodes, to scheduling posts to be published on a certain date, an easily moderated comment section and automatically displaying recent episodes on the homepage. Every Square Space website and online store includes SEO tools to help you maximize your visibility in search engines and I love the powerful insights I can get from the analytics tools, helping me better understand who's visiting

the site, where they came from and how they're interacting with it. Do you have a passion project or business idea or something to sell? Go to squarespace.com slash ctc for a free trial and when you're ready to launch use offer code CTC to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain that's squarespace.com slash ctc with offer code CTC and get your passion project off the ground today. The trial started in January of 2016 in Cam Loops, British Columbia for the first degree motor charge. The additional five charges for conspiring to kill witnesses was considered a separate issue and that case was still pending. Just as the trial was about to start, Peter Beckett got a lawyer to represent him. The Crown's theory was that Laura was killed

out of greed. Peter had taken several steps to acquire accidental death insurance several weeks before Laura's death because Laura was planning to leave him so she could reconcile with her parents. He wanted access to her money, life insurance policies and inheritance according to the Crown. Quote, he would also collect her school teacher's pension for the rest of his days which he would spend in the house she owned when they were married so he took her out on the zodiac to a secluded cove with the intention of causing her to fall from the boat and drown. The defence argued that it was not the Beckett's marriage that was strained but instead it was Laura's relationship with her own family that was the root of her problems. Through his lawyers, Peter was going to claim

that these family problems resulted in her depression and she could have been suicidal. The jury watched the video of the re-enactment in the boat where Peter showed the three RCMP investigators where the boat was and gave them a play by play as to what happened. Laura's mother Beth testified about Laura's unhappiness in the marriage and how she supported her daughter during the separation but then her relationship with Laura deteriorated after she and Peter reconciled and the family found out that Peter had been married before. On cross-examination, Peter's lawyer implied that Laura had been shunned or excommunicated by her family which was what made her depressed. Laura's mother denied that allegation saying that the reason why she cut

off contact with her daughter was because the stress of the situation had aggravated a medical condition she had. His lawyer also asked her about Laura's alleged rape as a child at the hands of a worker on the family farm with the implication that perhaps it contributed to her depression. Beth replied, I don't know that and added that Laura told her about it several years after it happened. Daryl, the paramedic who confirmed Laura's death once the pontoon boat had pulled up at the campsite, testified that Peter asked him a strange question at the time. Quote, he asked me if there was going to be bruises on his wife. I was a little taken aback. Daryl testified that he told Peter there might be bruises on her back where she was dragged

across the rocks to shore, but he said he noticed no bruising at the time. The pathologist who conducted the autopsy on Laura's body testified that there was an area of redness near her left cheekbone and said that pre-mortem injury or injury that happens before death can't be ruled out, but he added that finding unexplained red areas on bodies wasn't uncommon. He also testified that he found no evidence of CPR having been performed on Laura's body. When CPR is done with appropriate vigor, he said chest injuries like fractured ribs and red skin are common. The court heard testimony from other witnesses at the scene as well as friends of the couple. One of them was Laura's cousin and friend, Virginia, who testified about

that intense argument Peter and Laura had when they were together in Calgary the same year that they separated. But the next part of Virginia's story, where Laura confided in her later about Peter's prediction that she was going to die by drowning, was not allowed as evidence since it was hearsay. Peter's cellmate, turned RCMP informant, testified that it was the first time he'd ever cooperated with the police. Quote, given my background and history, my record, that's probably the worst thing someone of my caliber could do, to say the least. It's against every concode known to man. He said he went into segregation in prison shortly after the additional charges for conspiracy to commit murder were laid on Peter. Under cross-examination,

the defence tried to portray him as an unreliable psychopath who may have lied and entrapped Peter for the money. He fervently denied it. During the trial, Peter Beckett continued to bring the high drama, but never while the jury was in the room. Reporter Tim Petrick for Kamloops This Week described how on several occasions when the lawyers had to argue something in front of the judge and the jury was excused, Peter would be seen to have loud outbursts. When the jury came back, he was observed to be muttering under his breath. The judge cautioned him frequently about these incidents. On another occasion, his pants fell off as he stood up as the jury left the room.

Peter's trial was in 2016, when Donald Trump was trying to get the Republican nomination for the US presidency. On one occasion, before the jury entered, Peter Beckett endorsed Donald Trump's run for president, telling the court that Trump is what America needs because he's a, quote, proven businessman. 61-year-old Peter took the stand in his defence, even though his legal team had advised him against it. His lawyer's first question for him was a straightforward one. Did you push your wife off the boat or drown her? He replied, No, I did not. With his loud, booming voice and thick New Zealand accent, he proceeded to give a rambling history of how he met Laura, which was rife with tangential

stories and littered with random New Zealand trivia. For example, from the stand, he told the court that the word kiwi, the affectionate word for a New Zealander, does not actually come from the kiwi fruit. They're named after the kiwi bird, which is flightless. He then spoke about the day Laura died, describing earlier that day when they both went shopping together and Laura had her hair cut before their planned evening boat ride. Peter painted a happy picture of the day, but then he claimed that Laura's death was probably the result of suicide. He told the court that the rape she suffered as a child caused her years of depression. On cross-examination, the crown said that Peter's happy depiction of both the day and Laura's state of mind

was not consistent with someone who was severely depressed. He was told that he can't have it both ways. Was she happy and getting her hair done or was she depressed and suicidal? The crown prosecutor told the court that when Laura's body was pulled from the water, her shirt was on backwards. He suggested to Peter that it came off when he was drowning her, and then he reclothed her in a way that did not make sense. In reply, Peter said the prosecutor disgusted him. The crown suggested that it was helpful for Peter to have Laura in a situation where she would drown unless he saved her. Peter replied that this was offensive and total nonsense. Peter was also pressed about the variations in his stories. For example, in his RCMP statement,

he said that he heard a splash and Laura screaming and flailing in the water, but he told his neighbour and cellmate that he heard nothing at all. On the stand, Peter insisted that the correct version was that he heard nothing. Quote, Drowning is a silent death. People think it's panicking and screaming. It's not. It's a silent death, apparently. I've done a lot of research. Peter Beckett's drama continued with a Haka performance on the second day of his cross examination, again when the jury were out of the room. The Haka is the iconic Maori ceremonial dance known for stamping of the feet, vigorous arm movements and the aggressive poking out of tongues.

Generally, the Haka is performed in front of an opponent to demonstrate strength and prowess and ultimately intimidate them. Rugby team The New Zealand All Blacks are famous for performing the Haka on the field just before a game. After Peter's Haka performance, he declared that he was Rongokaka of Timata and told court officials to Google it. According to Google, he was referring to a Kiwi legend depicting a sleeping giant who bit his way through a hill to prove how dedicated he was to the woman he loved, and instead he ended up choking and dying. One of the witnesses for the defence was a friend of the couple named Anita, who was a vocal supporter of Peter. According to Kamloops this week, she described Laura as a

brilliant person who was willing to do anything for anyone, but she was also a troubled soul who had difficulty accepting help. Quote, you could tell there were things that were troubling her and it took a lot to get her to understand that there were people who were there for her. Anita said she didn't agree with others who called Peter overbearing and domineering. Quote, like any relationship, certain tasks were delegated to certain people. Peter is a gregarious guy, but Laura was never shadowed by him. She was confident being around and with him. Anita told the court that Laura's confidence took a big hit when her family openly shunned her after they learned Peter had been married before. She said Laura didn't know why her parents treated

her that way and that it was a great source of sadness for her. As you remember, Laura wasn't able to swim. Some friends had commented that she was terrified of the water and always wore a life jacket. In one statement, Peter said that she had a life jacket on and took it off when she got hot, but later he maintained that she never wore a life jacket and didn't have it on. It was just draped around her shoulders to carry it conveniently. Anita, the defense witness, agreed with Peter. She told the court that she went on numerous boat trips with Laura and Peter and never saw Laura wearing a life jacket. She told the court that she asked Laura why she didn't wear one and Laura replied that she, quote, always thought Peter would save her. Anita also said that after

Laura's death, Peter went to stay with her and her husband and they witnessed his grief and sadness over the loss of his wife. After a while, she said it got too much to be around so they eventually asked him to leave. In closing arguments, the crown focused on the number of inconsistencies in Peter's statements to police and to other witnesses. They argued that it was clear his statement was a fabrication and this meant he was responsible for Laura's death. Quote, all of his lies demonstrate that he is responsible for getting her in the water and keeping her there until she drowned. The prosecutor asked the jury to consider that fisherman's instinct story where Peter's first action when he noticed Laura was in the water

was not to rescue her but to reel in his fishing rod. Quote, Mr Beckett tells you that when his wife falls in the water, his instinct is to turn away from her. What would it be like to reel in a fishing rod while floating by a loved one who was flailing, kicking and screaming in the water next to them? The crown also referred to Peter's story about using a rock from the shore to sink himself down to Laura's body so he could pull it to shore. This story was described as defying common sense. Quote, the accused is lying to you about finding a rock and doing anything to save Laura. He wasn't trying to save her because he was trying to kill her. The jury was told that in order for them to convict Peter Beckett, the crown does not have to prove how Laura was killed,

only that Peter Beckett was responsible. The defense insisted that it was nothing more than a tragic accident and the crown's case was purely circumstantial. Quote, imagine if you were found guilty of murder simply because you were present for the demise of your spouse. The defense argued that the theory of financial motive didn't stand up. Laura handled all the insurance paperwork. It wasn't a huge amount of money, they said. In fact, Peter didn't even claim on the life insurance policies in the months after her death. And besides, if Peter was motivated by money at all, he would have been better off keeping Laura alive. The defense claimed that the cellmate turned RCMP informant was self-serving and unreliable

and also lied in court. And in any event, regardless of what the cellmate may have said, Peter never made any real efforts to secure potential inheritance from Laura's parents. With that, it was time for the jury to deliberate. And they took their time. After a week, they were unable to reach a consensus. One juror was still at odds with the others, a hung jury. It was declared a mistrial. Even though jury deliberations are secret and there was no way to know which way the majority of jurors were leaning, Peter did not know which way the jurors were. Peter declared that he knew for a fact that 11 of them wanted him acquitted. He speculated that maybe the 12th juror was planted to prevent that. From jail, he told Kamloops this week that

he believed justice officials were out to get him and Laura's family were behind it. He said he was disgusted by the court process and insisted that the Crown's theory that he lied was not enough of a basis to convict him of first-degree murder. Quote, Kangaroo Court doesn't even begin to describe what goes on in Kamloops. The mistrial triggered a second trial. In the lead-up, the Crown decided not to prosecute the five charges of conspiracy to commit murder, so the only charge left on the table was for first-degree murder. Peter's lawyers tried to have this charge drop to, saying the case had been delayed for too long, but this was dismissed. The second trial was held in Kelowna, British Columbia, where Peter's defence argued he'd

have a better chance at a fair trial. This trial was more focused than the first one, with the Crown honing in on the events of the day Laura died and the inconsistencies in Peter's various statements about what happened. This time, Peter did not take the stand in his defence. After four days, the jury reached a verdict. They found Peter Beckett guilty of first-degree murder. He received the mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole for at least 25 years. But that wasn't the end. Peter appealed the decision, arguing that the case was circumstantial. On September 29th, 2020, the BC Court of Appeal agreed, concluding that the judge made errors in instructing the jury and prosecutors made improper submissions to jurors.

The main issue was the fact that the prosecution presented Peter's initial statement to police as being a lie, and then argued that this lie was proof of his guilt. The facts of the case were that Laura went into the water and drowned, but there was no physical evidence that it was Peter who caused her to enter the water. It was impossible to determine that his statement was a lie, so in effect, the Crown presented unproven facts to jurors as if they were evidence, and the trial judge supported this. The BC Court of Appeal overturned Peter's guilty verdict. But it stopped short of a full acquittal, which means that it's now up to the Crown to decide whether it wants to move forward with a third trial. The decision details the Court's conclusion

that the Crown's case was not a strong one. One of the justices said, quote, in these circumstances, a very real question arises as to whether it is in the interests of justice to proceed with yet a third trial. CAM Loops this week provided an exclusive update that on November the 2nd, 2020, lawyers met in court to discuss the status of the case. The judge was told that prosecutors are still in the process of deciding what they want to do. They have three options. First, they could hold a third trial. Second, they could appeal the BC Court of Appeals decision to overturn Peter's conviction, or third, they could let him walk free. Now, in his mid-60s, Peter Beckett has been in prison for nine years. He will likely find out by

the end of this month whether he will be a free man again. I'll be sure to keep you updated. Laura Letts would have celebrated her 60th birthday this year. Her online obituary ended with lyrics from a Ronan Keating song that referenced her quiet, reserved and gentle nature. Quote, the smile on her face, the truth in her eyes, the touch of her hand, let us know what she needed. She said it best when she said nothing at all. Thanks for listening and special thanks to journalist Tim Petrick from Kamloops this week for suggesting this case and for his assistance in the production of the episode. Tim interviewed Peter more than 20 times in prison and also travelled to Alberta to talk with people who

knew the couple. His long-form article on the case was picked up by New Zealand media outlets. Tim and I had a chat about his experiences with reporting on the case and dealing with Peter Beckett both before and during the first trial. I started by asking him how he arranged the prison interviews with Peter Beckett and whether there was a formal process that he had to follow as a journalist. There's a lot of hoops kind of that you have to jump through. The process that I was taught for setting it up is just to write a letter to the prisoner that you want to talk to, ask them to put you on their list of people who they can talk to on the phone and then build a relationship and hopefully they'll put you on the visitor list.

So did you tell him or obviously you did that you were a journalist and you wanted to report on what he was saying? Yeah he knew. I mean I had seen him at the courthouse for I think I want to say years before we ever met in prison. It might have been a year. It's hard to say. This case has gone on for so long but I would see him at the courthouse regularly and just because of his physical condition he was in a wheelchair for a lot of his appearances so they would bring him not through the back like through the prisoner entrance into the courtroom but they would bring him up the elevator that you know the public uses in the courthouse and in through the front door of the courtroom and he's so chatty. He's a very talkative guy and he would just from the

elevator to the courtroom would just talk your ear off. So we had a bit of a rapport established before we ever met at jail. And what did you make of him when you met him? He's a really interesting guy. He's a smart guy. He's a well he's a well-spoken guy and he likes to talk and he's funny. He's yeah he's I mean I sound like I'm kind of gushing over him but I don't mean to do that. He's a really interesting guy to talk to obviously aside from whatever he's alleged to have done he's an interesting guy to talk to. Did you find that he was consistent between your interviews and how he appeared in your interviews and his court appearances? Yeah Peter the entire time that I've known him has always been very consistent in terms of how he carries himself,

how he speaks, his tone and his just steadfast denial of his guilt. He's been super consistent the entire time. So I told you that I grew up in New Zealand and I was quite amused to hear about all of the the different Kiwi things he said and the Kiwi words he was using you know like I liked how in one clip he he mentioned a chilli bin which is what we call an eski in Australia and I think a cooler in Canada a cooler box cooler bin I don't know that was quite funny but then he pivoted to the next sentence he said something and then he said a at the end which I found the juxtaposition of the Kiwi words and then the Canadian slang quite funny but what did you learn about New Zealand because of him like what were the craziest things that you never expected to

learn about New Zealand? Every time Peter told me something about New Zealand I would google it just to be sure because he he has a way of spinning things in his favor when he's hot. I mean he told me about this legend of a sleeping giant who was awoken referring to himself at one point in court which was interesting and he did a haka at one point in the courtroom which I think even people who are very unfamiliar or just casually familiar with New Zealand a haka is probably something that that everyone knows and associates with that place. How did the haka come about like I've seen it written that he performed the haka but how did he wind that into the court proceedings? The way it works if you've never been in a courtroom and

I think most people don't really know how it how it works exactly but before the judge comes in and the jury comes in there's like a couple minutes where it's typically the lawyers, the accused, the clerk, the sheriff, and whoever else is you know watching and there's the clerk setting things up and people are kind of chit chatting and during those little lulls or waiting periods that's when Peter would sometimes turn to the gallery and put on a show and the haka was I believe if I recall correctly it was one of those where it was before everyone else was in the courtroom and I think it's when he was testifying I'm pretty sure he was in the witness box and he just kind of if I recall he just turned to the courtroom and did kind of like a brief haka. What did everybody

do at the time? Were they just staring in disbelief or was there some laughing? I think most of the people in the courtroom didn't pay Peter much attention in those moments because I think rightly or wrongly I don't know there is a belief among probably the lawyers that were there that indulging him kind of like a certain kind of child might provoke more so and Peter and I had a bit of a relationship at that point so he would often turn to me like with this sleeping giant thing he turned to me and he said I think it was ranga ka is that it? Ranga ka ka of tomato. Yeah he said that and then he said that's me google it or something like that. Oh so he said that directly to you? Yeah and that was from he was standing in the witness box in that one of those

lulls waiting for court to get set up and he turned to the gallery and looked at me and said it. Yeah so and the haka I don't remember if it was directed at me it probably wasn't but it was yeah there was a lot of moments like that. What do you think was the most shocking thing that he did? He has a personality that like he's very loud he's very I don't know if performative is the right word but he's like he's always I guess performative is a good word he's always kind of putting on a show and there were lots of moments like that he talks this was when Donald Trump was running there was I think he was the nominee at that point in 2016 in the U.S. election and he he talked about he talked about Donald Trump and how he'd be good

for the U.S. there there was there was many moments like that the the most shocking surprising thing that stands out to me from Peter in court is his attitude when he was being cross-examined he was so combative he took things so personally it appeared to me and you know who knows Peter has all kinds of feelings about the motivations behind the prosecution after his wife's death. Yeah it's it's in the episode you know he thinks that it's a big conspiracy and it's driven by Laura's parents. Yeah and he just he got into it with the crown prosecutor and it was it was like they were going back and forth it was probably the most intense back and forth exchange like on a protracted scale that I've ever seen in a courtroom. Was this the one where he

told the prosecutor that he disgusted him and the prosecutor said well I am the prosecutor of the case so I have to say these things or was the incident you're referring to stranger than that. No I think that was probably part of it yeah it got it was hardly they were they were going at it pretty good but I mean Peter the entire time throughout the entire court process in the years leading up to his trial he all he was always really combative not usually ugly like that because it wasn't usually there wasn't really a back and forth to it he was just making you know accusations and claims typically but I mean he would rattle off insults that the judge and the lawyers and me and whoever else was there at times like that's a guy who believes or at least he has maintained real so

strongly that he did not do this and he's been in jail for nine years so whether I mean I don't know whether he did it or not but if you think about it from the perspective if you if you think you were in jail for nine years or something you didn't do you'd probably be really combative angry too. Yeah yep that's a very good point. It doesn't make it right and like I said who knows what happened but it's something to think about when you see stuff like that. So Laura's cousin Virginia's testimony it wasn't allowed in court and this is the testimony where Laura told her cousin that Peter predicted that she would die of drowning. Did you ever speak to Peter about this in prison and what was his explanation if you did.

We talked about it quite a bit because that was that was a really big piece of the Crown's case before it was ultimately not allowed to be used during the trial and Peter 100% denied that it ever happened. He said it was just completely made up a total fabrication by by the cousin and he said that for years and he said the same thing the entire time it never changed at all. He said there's just there's absolutely nothing to it. I wonder what motivation the cousin would have to say something like that if it wasn't true it's very strange. So you will I know you also interviewed people who knew the couple in Alberta you travelled there to talk to people and witnesses. What was your perspective of the situation?

I spent a couple days in West Lock that's the small town where they live where Laura's from and I talked to people who supported Peter who knew the couple who was friends with the couple and believed Peter and I talked to people who knew the couple and I talked to co-workers of Laura's and friends of Laura's who thought Peter murdered her. So there's people who believe both things and during the trial there was a woman from West Lock named Wendy Breakcruz who basically moved to Kamloops for six months or however long the trial was and spent every single day in the courtroom. She was very good friends with Laura and she was definitely not on team Peter. She also went to the Kelowna trial she told me. So there's I mean there's people

it's not like the entire town of West Lock thinks Peter did this or thinks Peter's innocent there's there's people on both sides. Did you ever speak with Laura's parents? I did not I tried to a couple times and I had no luck. I was told through kind of other channels that Laura's family didn't want to talk to anyone like media-wise so I respected that and I stopped trying to talk to them. I would really I would really be interested too though if they ever changed their mind. Now with the appeal it's quite rare to have a first degree murder conviction thrown over on appeal. Were you expecting it to go this way? No I wasn't I was really surprised but again I didn't I wasn't at the Kelowna trial so I didn't see it and I don't I didn't see the things that

were appealed but just knowing what I knew of the case I was quite surprised when I found out that he'd won his appeal. Yeah it's something that doesn't happen every day it's a pretty big deal and yeah it was it was definitely a surprise. Do you keep tabs on what the word on the street is now like people thinking that the crown will choose to drop it or do you think they'll press ahead with with a third trial do you have any insights into that? I've talked to some people at the courthouse I've talked to one person who's very close to that second trial that was appealed and everything I've heard is that it's quite unlikely that there will be a third trial but who knows it's ultimately in the hands of this one prosecutor in Kamloops and he has until the

end of November to decide Peter's fate really. There's also the possibility that the crown will appeal the decision overturning Peter's conviction I don't know I don't know what the likelihood of that is really I haven't talked to anyone I don't know those crown appeal lawyers who do that stuff so I I don't even know how I would try to find out how that's going so yeah that's a chance also but everything I've heard about the third trial is that it's quite unlikely but who knows. So out of everything to do with this case for you what's the most mysterious thing that you just can't figure out like there's so many vague aspects to this case what for you is like the sticking point? I don't know if there's one like mystery that that really stands out to me

obviously did Peter kill his wife that's that's a question um the thing that really stands out to me about this case is just like the dichotomy like the the two extreme ends of the spectrum when you talk to Peter about his relationship with Laura and it's just like a story book like romantic comedy just perfect fairytale love story and then you read that affidavit that this is how you're gonna die affidavit and you hear the things in court that were said and you think of you know Peter murdering Laura allegedly and like those things are just so far apart that's what I find most interesting about this case is just kind of the the vast like the gap between those two ends of this. Did he ever talk about you know there's there was that incident where Laura

reported to the police that there was some kind of abusive incident did he ever reference those kind of things like did he deny it or did he ever say something like you know our marriage wasn't perfect it had out had its issues it just seems to me like he constantly maintained that it was the perfect marriage even though there was this like direct evidence I mean sure the prediction of drowning thing um he could dispute that but he could not dispute the fact that there was a police report put in for some kind of abuse did he ever talk about that? He did I mean the police report went nowhere so you wonder about it um I don't know what happened when I talked to Peter about it he said that I mean he admitted don't get me wrong he he admitted that he him and and Laura

would argue like any couple argues about things but specifically about the police report I did talk to him about it and he said that Laura was put up to it by her family because they were very unhappy with her being with a divorced guy essentially is what he said. That's interesting yeah Again thank you so much to Tim Patrick from Cam Loops this week for suggesting this case and for giving me some of his valuable time thanks also to Hagar Barak for the research overview the host of True for voicing the disclaimer and also to We Talk of Dreams who composed the theme song I am getting the hell out of here but I'll be back soon with another Canadian true crime story see you then you

you